[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Upgrade procedure for tetex

Chris Fearnley <cjf@netaxs.com> writes:

> There are several principles the developer overlooked.

And what are those?

>   if package is depended on my many packages, be conservative and
> don't conflict with said package (merely replace and provide).

That will achieve a completel different purpose - the old package
won't be uninstalled.

>   if package is partially replaced by tetex-base, save the conflicts
> and provides lines for tetex-bin.


> - Why does tetex-doc " Conflicts: latex2e-doc" and "Replaces:
> latex2e-doc"?  They seem to have no files in common.

/usr/info/latex* are identical in content.

> Finally, I dislike the "non-conceptual" names of the packages.  Why
> can't tetex-base and tetex-bin be merged into one package?  When would
> I need to install tetex-dev?  Etc,

tetex-base = arch independent
tetex-bin  = arch dependent, ie - binaries
tetex-dev  = tetex development, ie  - you want to compile tetex

>  I still think it's
> prudent to hold off until the next release.

Do you use TeX alot, Chris?  I ask because, in my opinion, the 1.2
distribution is crap, and tetex is the standard TeX distribution


Reply to: